9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 617X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or disposal as per law. 2. Initially the matter had been adjudicated by the Assistant Collector which had been appealed against before the Collector (Appeals), Trichy by orders in Appeal No. 78 to 81/92 (CBE), dated 19-3-1992. He took into consideration four orders in original by the said order. In the first para of the said order in appeal he had clearly noted that the department was not in a position to accept the appellants contention that the dealers located at different places cannot be treated as different class of buyers and hence the different price adopted by the appellants are not legal. On this question, after due examination of law then existing, he remanded the matter for de novo consideration. The matter was taken up for de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in depth including the Tribunal judgments, High Court and the Supreme Court and have concluded that different prices adopted for different class of buyers in different regions are required to be treated as different class of buyers in terms of Section 4 of the Act. Therefore she submits that the appeals are required to be allowed with consequential relief. 4. The learned DR Shri S. Kannan, after due verification of the orders contends that the Assistant Collector in the de novo consideration was guided by the Bombay High Court judgment in the case of M/s. Godrej Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. which at that time was the law as it stood and therefore no fault can be found with orders passed by the AC. He further submits that before the Collec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore the Collector (Appeals). However, the Collector (Appeals), in the impugned order has confused himself to note that this was not the ground of appeals and treated the pleading of the appellants as new ground to reject the appeals. After detailed consideration of all the orders in original and the earlier order in appeal, we note that the Collector (Appeals) has misdirected himself in his order. We are now required to consider as to whether the AC has rightly rejected the plea as pleaded by the appellants. The learned Counsel contends that in view of the three judgments the issue has been clearly decided in the assessee s favour. The present law is that different prices from different dealers in different regions are treated as differen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
